Automated Container Terminal Simulation Modeling
4 likes1,349 views
The document discusses simulation modeling for a fully automated container terminal, specifically at the Brisbane Autostrad Terminal and the East Swanson Dock in Melbourne. It compares different site layouts and operational techniques, presenting analysis results that highlight improvements in container handling flexibility and safety. The document concludes with details on the optimum equipment fleet required and ongoing analysis capabilities.
Automated Container Terminal Simulation Modeling
- 1. 1 Simulation Modeling of a Fully Automated Container Terminal Vijay Agrawal Sr. Transportation Analyst DMJM Harris | AECOM
- 2. 2 Overview – Brisbane AutoStrad Terminal – Alternative Site Plans – Operations Analysis Techniques – Simulation Analysis Results – Layout Comparison and Cost Analysis
- 3. 3 Brisbane AutoStrad Terminal, Australia Reefer Operations ..separating men and machines Gate service done via Remote control in lanes Truck holding area Berth 7-9 at Fisherman Island
- 4. 4 East Swanson Dock Container Terminal Melbourne, Australia
- 5. 5 Option 1 Before Peer Review Reefer locations cause mechanics to travel thru CY to service reefers Exchange areas appear to be properly configured, but overall size in question Five unit storage block Module configuration limits storage flexibility w/ 40’ boxes AutoStrad/RMG Access Points
- 6. 6 Option 1 After Peer Review Six unit storage block Module configuration is suggested to increase flexibility AutoStrad/Truck Exchange Area Reconfigured and Sized Reefer operations were Moved at the perimeter of the CY AutoStrad/RMG Access Points
- 7. 7 Option 2 Before Peer Review Reefer locations cause mechanics to travel thru CY to service reefers No truck safety barrier for BC/Truck transfer AutoStrad/BC Access Points
- 8. 8 Option 2 After Peer Review Reefer operations were Moved at the perimeter of the CY Truck safety barrier for BC/Truck transfer AutoStrad/BC Access Points
- 9. 9 Option 3 Before Peer Review Reefer locations cause mechanics to travel thru CY to service reefers AutoStrad/ASC Access Points
- 10. 10 Option 3 After Peer Review Reefers were moved at the perimeter of the CY AutoStrad/ASC Access Points
- 11. 11 Preliminary Layout Comparison • Offers highest degree of flexibility • Better access to any given container in yard • Limited but Safe Truck/AutoStrad exchange slots • Long AutoStrad Travel • Trucks have to back in • Offers next degree of flexibility • Limited Truck/BC exchange area • Requires controlled truck maneuvering through multi- BC zones • Trucks do NOT have to back in • Least flexible • Long ASC travel distance • Trucks have to back in • Double B trucks backing in poses traffic challenge at high volume
- 13. 13 C0 C1 C2 C3 Ship 1 C4 Dock cranes 0,1,2,3,4 C5 C6 C7 Ship 2 C8 Ship 3 C9 C10 C11 Dock crane 5,6,7,8 Dock crane 9,10,11 40 Gate Slots: Uniform Gate Load Distribution Type a Type b Type c Type e Type d Load Distribution Option 1
- 14. 14 Modeled Gate Truck Arrival Pattern Chart 100 116 113 94 95 98 92 94 116 109 90 90 93 114 96 89 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Time of Day (Hour) Trucksperhour
- 16. 16 Variable Gate Strads vs. Truck Service Time Option 1 3 RMGs per Row No Stevedoring Operations 394% 194% 116% 115% 108% 100% 101% 100% 100% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% 450% 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 40 Number of Gate Strads NormalizedTruckTurnTime
- 17. 17 Variable Vessel Strads vs. DC Productivity Option 1 3 RMGs per Row 25 Gate Strads, Variable Stevedoring Strads
- 18. 18 Variable Vessel Strads vs. DC Productivity Option 1 2 RMGs per Row 25 Gate Strads, Variable Stevedoring Strads
- 19. 19 Variable Gate Strads vs. Truck Time Option 1 2 RMGs per Row 4 Stevedoring Strads per Dock Crane
- 20. 20 Vessel Load Distribution (Horizontal) Option 2 C0 C1 C2 C3 Ship 1 C4 Crane 0, 1 Crane 2, 3 Crane 4, 5 Crane 6, 7 Crane 8, 9 Crane 10, 11 C5 C6 C7 Ship 2 C8 Ship 3 C9 C10 C11
- 21. 21 Load Distribution (Vertical) Option 2 Stevedoring 0% 0% 100% Gate a b c d e 0% 0% 0% 5% 15% 30% 50%
- 23. 23 Variable Bridge Cranes Option 2 6 Vessel Strads Per Dock Crane
- 24. 24 Variable Strads Option 2 2 Bridge Cranes Per Row
- 27. 27 Variable Strads Option 3 2 RMGs per Row Variable Strads
- 28. 28 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percentage % free % move % work R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 Stevedoring vs. Gate Crane Time Breakdown Option 3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percentage R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 %Work %Move %Free %Work %Move %Free StevedoringGate
- 29. 29 Layout Comparison and Cost Analysis
- 30. 30 Optimum Equipment Fleet Required
- 31. 31 Cost per Lift
- 32. 32 Custom Simulation Tool – Ongoing Analysis
- 33. 33 Thank You for Attending Contact Information: Vijay Agrawal Vijay.Agrawal@DMJMHarris.com Phone: 510-844-0576
- 34. Copyright information Copyright © 2008 Navis, A Zebra Technologies Company. All Rights Reserved. Unless otherwise noted, document contents © 2008 Navis, A Zebra Technologies Company (“Navis”). All rights reserved. This document and any files attached to it are intended only for authorized agents of Navis, and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent of Navis, you are strictly prohibited from reading, copying, distributing, disclosing or otherwise using this document and any of its contents. The information contained in this document is proprietary to Navis. Reproduction, distribution or republication of any such information, electronic, broadcast, print or otherwise without the prior written consent of Navis is strictly prohibited. Please send all reproduction requests to Navis, 1000 Broadway Ste. 150, Oakland, CA 94607 or email to marketing@navis.com. This document is subject to change without notice, and Navis does not warrant that the material contained in this document is error-free. If you find any problems with, or errors in, this document, please report them to Navis in writing. Products licensed by Navis are covered by the terms and conditions set forth in its license agreements. This document contains or may contain statements of future direction concerning possible functionality for Navis’ software products and technology. All functionality and software products will be available for license and shipment from Navis only if and when generally commercially available. Navis disclaims any express or implied commitment to deliver functionality or software unless or until actual shipment of the functionality or software occurs. The statements of possible future direction are for information purposes only and Navis makes no express or implied commitments or representations concerning the timing and content of any future functionality or releases. Navis, the Navis logo, Navis™ SPARCS N4, Navis™ SPARCS, Navis PowerStow®, Navis Express®, Navis WebAccess®, Navis™ SPARCS Analytics, Navis™ SPARCS Monitor, Navis™ SPARCS Auto Stow, Navis™ SPARCS Expert Decking, Navis™ SPARCS Quay Commander, Navis™ SPARCS Prime Route, Navis™ Edge Manager Auto Gate, Navis™ Edge Manager RTLS, Navis™ Edge Manager Safe Seal, Navis™ Yard, Navis™ Scheduler, and Navis™ Visibility are trademarks of Navis, A Zebra Technologies Company. No display or use of such trademarks may be made without the express prior written permission of Navis. All other company and product names may be trademarks of their respective owners. If you have any questions or concerns, please call Navis, A Zebra Technologies Company at 510.267.5000.